In Re Paul L. Handy (Town of Shelburne, Appellant) in Re Jolley Associates

Summary

The court held that the zoning statute created a single moratorium period running from public notice of a proposed amendment through its effective date, and did not distinguish between applications filed before adoption and those filed afterward. It further held that the statute was unconstitutional because it gave selectboards unfettered discretion, without standards, to determine whether applications would proceed under existing bylaws. The court therefore applied Vermont's vested-rights rule, affirming the result in Handy, vacating the result in Jolley, and remanding both matters for good-faith determinations. Johnson, J., dissenting, would have upheld the statute and remanded both cases for abuse-of-discretion review.